Raising
Japanese Students' Consciousness of English Article Usage: A Practical
View

Robert W. Norris

1992. In Fukuoka Women's
Junior College
Studies
Vol. 44: 95-104

Introduction

One of the most difficult problems facing Japanese junior
college
and
university students of English is the use of the articles "a" and
"the."
These students often can formulate grammatical definitions for definite
and indefinite articles, as well as cite a few rules governing their
usage,
but when it comes to actual production of these two troublesome words
in
speech or in writing, the students seem to all but throw up their hands
in despair.

This paper offers teachers a possible solution for helping
students
overcome their difficulties in acquiring a working knowledge of "a" and
"the." This solution is divided into four parts: (1) understanding why
articles are so difficult for the students, (2) understanding the type
of grammatical knowledge the students possess, (3) raising students'
cognitive
consciousness through simple extended descriptions, and (4) using
visuals
for promoting meaningful learning in production exercises.

Why are Articles So Difficult?

One reason English articles present so much difficulty to
ESL/EFL
(English
as a second/foreign language) students is the vastness and complexity
of
the rules and exceptions governing article usage. Cromwell (1964: 38)
writes,
"Every student of English has my sympathy in his struggles with the
articles
'a,' 'an,' and 'the.'" then goes on to detail 16 pages of rules and
exceptions.
In one ESL text, Robinson (1967) lists 44 separate rules. Quirk, et al.
(1985) go even further, spending 32 pages on article usage.

In addition to the many rules and exceptions of the English
article
system, the Japanese student of English is also burdened by the fact
that
there is no grammatical equivalent to articles in her own native
language.
In an analytical study of structural errors found in 632 English
compositions
written by Japanese students in American high schools and junior
colleges,
Kimizuka (1967) found more mistakes in article usage than in any other
structural category. Kimizuka (1967: 78-79) explains this phenomenon:

Japanese has no part of speech equivalent of English articles....That
article usage constitutes one of the greatest problems for the Japanese
learner is vividly revealed in the high frequency of mistakes, the
highest
of all the structural items. The Japanese student must not only learn
the
numerous rules for the usage with as many exceptions, but he must also
practice them by drill. It is comparatively simple to learn the rules,
but it is not equally simple to apply the rules to actual situations.

With such seemingly impossible barriers to overcome, what are teachers
of Japanese students to do? For starters, we must reevaluate the
methods
we have been using to teach article usage, as well as what activities
we
have been using to give students practice in production of articles. To
do this, we first must have an awareness of what kind of knowledge the
students possess, what their learning habits are, and what their
motivation
level is.

What Do the Students Know?

Japanese students at the junior college and university level
bring
with
them a great deal of passive knowledge and little experience in
applying
that knowledge to anything outside of discrete-point grammar test
questions.
Dissosway (1989: 13) elaborates on this background:

[Japanese students have] spent hours learning prescriptive grammar
within the grammar-translation framework of junior and senior high
school
English classes. At that time, the role of English grammar teaching was
almost exclusively enabling students to handle short-answer,
discrete-item
questions, like those found in university entrance examinations.
Examination
preparation was the motivating force for administrators,
teachers,
and students alike.

The results of this early exposure to English through prescriptive
grammar
instruction are not always positive. Dissosway (1989: 14) explains:

While a great deal of English has been crammed into heads throughout
the high school years, the perceivable results are depressing to many
students.
First, communication skills, not an object of high school study, are
weak.
Second, cramming of vocabulary and grammar rules in the absence of
meaningful
context or in teaching situations where available context is ignored
does
not produce long-term knowledge. Much painfully acquired information is
quickly forgotten, leaving the students wondering exactly what they
have
learned, or how much English they know....Memorization of discrete
items,
heavy reliance on dictionaries, passive acceptance of teachers'
instruction,...and
passive classroom behavior are likely to characterize university
classes,
unless teachers and students work actively to change those habits.

What clearly needs to be done at the junior college and university
level
is to build on students' passive knowledge and work to motivate the
students
in making the transition to active production through meaningful
learning.
The author proposes doing this by using grammar consciousness-raising
(CR)
techniques and visuals in production exercises.

Consciousness-Raising and Meaningful Learning

Before describing the author's lesson plans for teaching "a"
and
"the,"
it is important to first have an understanding of what is meant by
grammatical
consciousness-raising. Rutherford and Smith (1988: 3) say:

CR is intended to embrace a continuum ranging from intensive promotion
of conscious awareness through pedagogical role articulation on the one
end, to the mere exposure of the learner to specific grammatical
phenomena
on the other....What is important...are possible answers to questions
having
to do with what we choose to bring to consciousness, what motivates
the choice, when and how (i.e., by what means) we raise
something
to consciousness, how often we call attention to it, how
detailed is
the information revealed in the exemplars, and what effect on
learner
behavior the information is intended to have.

Meaningful exploration of questions such as these carries the
assumption
that CR is not an end in itself. Corder (1988: 130) states:

Pedagogical descriptions of the target language must be devised to
help the learner learn whatever it is he learns, but are not
necessarily
what he learns. Pedagogical descriptions are aids to learning,
not
the object of learning.

Herein lies the difference between the type of teaching most Japanese
junior
college and university students have been exposed to in their junior
and
senior high school days and the point of transition they need to cross
in order to apply practically what they have learned. During their
earlier
exposure to English these students have been instructed through what
Smith
(1977) calls "concentrated descriptions," that is, metalinguistic
statements
or observations exclusive of learner variables. Rote learning is a
by-product
of concentrated descriptions of grammar rules. The use of Smith's
(1977)
"extended descriptions" (i.e., on-line grammatical information tailored
to the exigencies of particular learning situations) is more
specifically
linked with a practice component, and in turn to Ausubel's (1968)
"meaningful
learning" (i.e., processing new information within the context of old).

In other words, teachers of Japanese junior college and
university
students
should use the students' passive knowledge as both a starting point and
a springboard for giving extended descriptions and meaningful practice
of the structures the students are in the process of acquiring.

Visuals and Imagery

Psychological and psychologically-oriented experimental
research
seems
to indicate that for all types of learners the maximum use of extra
visual
devices is necessary for unimpeded effective learning to take place
(Smith,
1988). Maximizing visual representations to accompany, illustrate, and
explain linguistic items may well improve learning a great deal,
especially
where the content is too abstract to expect the learner to grasp a
verbal
explanation of a grammatical item.

Stevick (1986: 50-51) extends this importance of visuals to
his
usage
of the word "image":

An image is not merely visual. It may include any dimension--sight,
hearing, texture, weight, temperature, motion, time, purpose, emotion,
and many others--and commonly includes more than one of these
dimensions
at the same time....Images are not to be valued in language study for
their
own sake. They are valuable because the process of generating them
involves
activating nexuses and establishing new ones among networks of items
which
will be needed for generating images--both nonverbal and verbal--on
future
occasions; and because rewards that come from having generated them
strengthen
the nexuses and make the networks more solid, more complete, and more
usable.

A Rod Lesson

Keeping in mind the background of the students we are
teaching, the
passive knowledge they possess, the basic principles of CR and extended
descriptions, and the effectiveness of using visuals and imagery to
enhance
learning, we now turn to some plans for teaching the rudiments of the
articles
"a" and "the." This first plan involves using a box of cuisenaire rods.
For this particular lesson plan, the rods serve four main purposes:

They appeal to the senses. Therefore, they attract and hold
students'
attention.

They are simple in shape and color. Therefore, they
concentrate
students'
attention.

They have no unnecessary markings or details of shape.
Therefore,
they
present an open field for the students' imagination. They are like
concrete
abstractions which can be put to a wide range of uses.

They let students see and handle some of the abstractions
that
may be
hard
to follow in an explanation that consists only of words. (Stevick,
1986:
143-144)

The teacher writes the words "a," "the," "another," and "the other(s)"
on the board. He also writes "Take _____ rod." He puts several rods of
the same color in a shallow box. He walks up to a student, motions for
her to take a rod, says the word "take," and points to the board,
indicating
that the student must select the correct word to fill the blank between
"take" and "rod." After eliciting "a," the teacher says "Take one more
rod," points again to the board, and elicits "another." This
elicitation
of "another" continues until there is one rod remaining, at which time
"the other" is elicited. The teacher repeats the process with another
student
until there are two or three rods remaining. He tells the student to
take
all the remaining rods, and elicits "the others" or "the other rods."

Next, the teacher puts three rods in the box, goes to another
student,
and elicits "take a rod," "take another rod," and "take the other rod."
He then puts two rods in the box, goes to another student, and elicits
"take a rod," and "take the other rod." He puts one rod in the box,
goes
to a different student, and elicits "take the rod." Finally, he puts
several
rods in the box, goes to another student, tells her to take all the
rods,
and elicits, "take the rods." During this phase there is usually a lot
of confusion and guessing among the students. The teacher remains
nonjudgmental
about their guesses. He simply refuses to allow them to take the rods
until
the correct answer is forthcoming.

The teacher goes to the board and writes the following
extended
descriptions:

"a"-the first of two or more

"the"-the only one

"another"-one more

"the other(s)"-the remaining one(s)

Next, the teacher takes a rod, puts it in the center of the box, and
asks,
"Where is the rod?" He writes all the answers the students give on the
bard until "It is in the center of the box" is agreed upon as the
correct
answer. He underlines both "the's" and asks why we must use "the" in
front
of "center" and "box." If no answer is forthcoming, he refers the
students
to the extended descriptions until someone answers that there is only
one
center and one box.

The teacher repeats the "Where is the rod?" questioning for
each of
the four corners, making sure the students understand the use of "the"
in "in the top right corner," "in the bottom left corner," etc.

Next, the class is divided into groups of four or five
students. A
shoebox
lid is placed upside down before each group. This is preferable to a
book
or piece of paper in order to prevent confusion about the use of "in"
(as
opposed to "on"). Each student is assigned a role with in her group:
"action
person," "___ing question person," "___ing answer person," "past-tense
question person," and "past-tense answer person." In groups of four,
the
"action person" can also take the role of "past-tense answer person."
Each
group is given ten rods (two red, two blue, two green, one yellow, and
three white).

The lesson now turns into a Total Physical Response (TPR)
exercise
with
students carrying out the following five commands:

Take a red rod and put it in the center of the box.

Take the other red rod and put it in top right corner of
the box.

Take a white rod and put it in the bottom right corner of
the box.

Take another white rod and put it in the bottom left corner
of
the box.

Take the other white rod and put it in the top left corner
of the
box.

After each command, while the "action person" is carrying out the
command,
the "___ing question person" asks, "What is she doing?" The "___ing
answer
person" responds. Then the "past-tense question person" asks, "What did
she/you do?" The "past-tense answer person" responds. The students are
encouraged to help each other in formulating their questions and
answers.
Before each new command, the students rotate roles.

After these five commands and the questioning and answering
have
been
completed, the teacher points to each of the five rods and asks, "Which
rod is this?" The students are guided to use relative clauses in
answering
"It is the rod which is in the center/top right corner/etc. of the
box."
The teacher asks why "the" is used in front of "rod." After eliciting
"the
only one in the center/top right corner/etc.," the teacher adds "the
one(s)
that exist in a particular space" to the extended description of "the"
written earlier on the board.

After some review of locative prepositions and making
sentences such
as "It is to the right of the rod which is in the bottom left corner of
the box," the teacher continues the TPR lesson with these new commands:

6. Take a green rod and put it above the rod which is in the center
of the box.

7. Take the other green rod and put it under the rod which
is in
the
top right corner of the box.

8. Take a blue rod and put it to the left of the rod which
is in
the
bottom right corner of the box.

9. Take the other blue rod and put it to the right of the
rod
which
is in the bottom left corner of the box.

10. Take the yellow rod and put it under the rod which is in
the
center
of the box.

The teacher draws this figure on the board:

The teacher also writes the words "first," "next," and
"finally" on
the board. The students are told to tell the story chorally of what
they
have done. For example, "First we put a red rod in the center of the
box.
Next, we...." When finished, the students write the ten steps. The
teacher
collects the papers, corrects any mistakes, and hands them back in the
next class.

Picture Lessons

In following classes, the teacher reviews the extended
descriptions
for "a" and "the," hands out copies of pictures, and has the students
write
sentences about the pictures. One possibility is using picture
differences.
Working in groups, the students must find the differences and write
sentences
describing the differences. For example, "In the first picture the man
who is in the top left side has long hair, but in the second picture he
has short hair."

In this picture difference lesson, the teacher walks around
giving
personal
assistance where necessary. Various grammatical problems invariably
arise,
but the fundamental focus should be on the students' article usage,
with
the teacher guiding the students to use their own knowledge, to test
out
their own hypotheses, and to make their own discoveries.

Another picture lesson uses one "before" picture (showing a
dirty
room)
and one "after" picture (showing the same room after it has been
cleaned).
The teacher reviews the extended descriptions of "a" and "the," then
adds
this new criteria:

"a"--a thing or person which the reader or listener does
not
know.
Perhaps
he will know soon, but at this moment he does not know. The writer or
speaker
uses "a" for the first reference to new information.

"the"--the thing(s) or person(s) which the writer or
speaker has
been
talking
about and which the reader or and listener knows. In other words, old
information
both writer and reader (or speaker and listener) know about. New
information
becomes old information the second time it is used.

The teacher gives the students the "before" picture and has them write
sentences about what has to be done to the room. The teacher refers
back
to steps 6-10 in the rod lesson and the usage of "the" when talking
about
the existence of things in a particular space (e.g., "the rod which is
in the center of the box."). The teacher writes these sample sentences
on the board: "The window which is in the top left corner of the
picture
has to be opened." "The window which is in the room has to be opened."
"The window which you and I know about has to be opened." The teacher
then
erases all the relative clauses and explains that they are not
necessary
because both he and the students know which window is being talked
about.
The sample sentence now becomes "The window has to be opened."

After the students complete about ten sentences, each
beginning with
"The (window/bed/books/etc.)," they are given the "after" picture,
which
should contain at least two new items that were not in the "before"
picture.
The students are told to write sentences about what has been done to
the
room. The teacher gives one sample sentence: "The window has been
opened."
The teacher makes no further reference to the new criteria for using
articles,
but does tell the students he knows nothing about the second picture.
He
has information about just the first picture.

The object of this lesson is to guide the students toward
discovering
on their own that they must use "a" for the new items (i.e., new
information)
in the second picture, as in "A painting has been hung on the
wall"
and "A tablecloth has been put on the table." It is crucial the
teacher not explicitly explain the correct answers. The students must
be
allowed to produce them on their own. This is in keeping with the
concept
of meaningful learning as opposed to rote learning.

A Composition Lesson

After two or three lessons using pictures, the students can
next be
asked to apply their knowledge in a two- or three-page story. The
author
has found that providing a simple list of writing guidelines and the
first
paragraph both focuses the students' grammatical consciousness and
stimulates
their imagination. The writing guidelines and lead paragraph the author
has used most often in his eisakubun (writing) classes are
listed
below:

Stop before every noun you use and ask yourself, "Do I need
to
use 'a,'
or 'the' here?"

Use paragraphs. Indent the first line of each paragraph.

Verbs should be mainly in the past tense.

First paragraph: It was getting dark. Tony and Alice
were
lying
together
on the beach. Except for them the beach was deserted. Everything was
quiet
and peaceful except for the sound of the sea. Suddenly, they saw
something
moving in the water.

It is recommended to allow the students to work on their stories in
small
groups. Bailey and Celce-Murcia (1979: 321) say that students can
benefit
from collaborating on written work as "pairs or groups of students
writing
a paper together can share ideas, suggest vocabulary, and correct one
another's
grammar problems."

After the rough drafts are completed, students exchange papers
and
check
for errors based on the writing guidelines they have been given. Final
drafts are then written and handed in to the teacher.

Conclusion

This paper has examined why English article usage is so
difficult
for
Japanese students, the type of grammatical knowledge they possess at
the
junior college and university level, and a plan for raising students'
grammatical
consciousness of articles through extended descriptions, meaningful
learning,
and the use of visuals and imagery in structural and composition
practice.

The author has found that it is also possible to use CR
techniques
for
several grammatical problem areas simultaneously within a single
lesson.
For example, in the rod lesson not only can practice of articles be
accomplished,
but also practice of locative prepositions, relative clauses,
transitive
verbs, and object pronouns. It is simply up to the teacher to establish
the focal areas and the depth of the extended descriptions he chooses
to
use. Since the author began incorporating CR techniques into his eisakubun
classes, he has seen a marked improvement in all grammatical areas
covered,
including the troublesome "be" verb.

As was pointed out previously, the use of CR techniques is
meant to
be a means to an end rather than an end itself. It is intended to
facilitate
the acquisition of target language grammatical competence. The lessons
and extended descriptions discussed in this paper are merely an
introduction
to the complexity of English article usage. Further refinements and new
descriptions can be introduced step by step as students continue to
make
progress. When designing practice activities, the teacher should always
be conscious of leading the students toward self-discovery and active
application
of the structures being learned. As long as decisions are involved,
even
if they are only semantic or concerned with syntactic processes already
supposed to be known, then the students are forced, to some degree, to
understand what they are doing, and in the process discover something
about
the structure in question.

In using CR techniques to teach English article usage or any
grammatical
structure, a teacher needs to make a leap of faith to what Corder
(1985)
calls "a guided inductive approach." Corder (1985: 133) defines this
phrase:

Learning is seen as fundamentally an inductive process, but one which
can be controlled and facilitated by descriptions and explanations
given
at the appropriate moment and formulated in a way which is appropriate
to the maturity, knowledge, and sophistication of the learner. In a
sense,
teaching is a matter of providing the learner with the right data at
the
right time and teaching him how to learn, that is, developing in him
appropriate
learning strategies and means of testing his hypotheses. The old
controversy
about whether one should provide the rule first and then the examples,
or vice versa, is now seen to be merely a matter of tactics to which no
categorical answer can be given. Giving a rule or description first
means
no more than directing the learner's attention to the problem or, in
psychological
terms, establishing a "set" toward, or readiness for, the task; giving
the examples or the data first means encouraging the learner to develop
his own mental set of strategies for dealing with the task.

In the final analysis, students must have data on which to base their
hypotheses
about the semantic or syntactic function of each new item or structure
they learn. They may or may not benefit from descriptions and
explanations
about how the items or structures work, but they must, in any case,
develop
hypotheses and be given the opportunity to test the correctness of
these
hypotheses. This means students must be given the chance to make
decisions
and consequently run the risk of errors. The function of the teacher is
to provide data and examples, and, where necessary, to offer
explanations,
descriptions, and verification of the students' hypotheses. To this
end,
the author has made the leap of faith to using CR techniques in a
guided
inductive approach. Thus far the results have been encouraging.